GUILTY UT - Michele MacNeill, 50, found dead in bathtub, Pleasant Grove, 11 April 2007 - #2

Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Bravo said:
Anyone else catch on HLN that Gypsy's Parents are on the list to testify? There was a link somebody posted that did not put Gypsy in a favorable light. Family statements.
Click to expand...

I remember hearing her family say nasty things about her in the 20/20 episode (or was it a Dateline episode?)

Just now listening to her testimony.
 
Isabelle said:
I saw that blurb on HLN that Gypsy's parents were to testify and throughout that was strange. Wonder if they had any encounters with MM?
Click to expand...

They did. It's on the video I posted.
 
seattlechiquita said:
<modsnip> this dude is THE creep of all creeps. I am left with more question than answers:

1. Where is Vanessa? Is she ok?
2. FORCIBLE SEXUAL ASSAULT on Alexis? What's the deal with that? Statys?

I am disgusted.
Click to expand...

Pure evil. I have not read anything on Vanessa current. Disgusting for sure.
 
Italy said:
Wow. That is compelling. Now I realize even more how poorly the prosecution team is presenting this case. Simply astounding to read the affidavit in its entirety.

The prosecution has got to get someone on board who can present the facts to the jury evenly, completely & with authority. That is NOT being done by the prosecution attorneys and that failure is either recklessness on the part of the DA or incompetence. Time is running out and they are going to lose in spite of this most damning recount on the part of Chief Robinson.

Thanks for providing the link.
Click to expand...

---------
I agree with you. This is going down the tubes.:seeya:
 
Here is a 20/20 episode the girls did about their dad. Notice how calm and well spoken sweet Rachel is in this interview. She had to be scared to death to take the stand and testify against her father! Plus it was probably the first time she had to be in the same room with this monster in years! I think she did good on the stand, considering all she has been through. I cannot imagine being in her shoes.

http://abcnews.go.com/2020/wifes-de...or-revealed/story?id=12982985&singlePage=true
 
The Prosecution has not yet presented its entire case. So there is evidence yet to come. Witnesses yet to testify.

In reading the Robinson declaration, I noticed that two different experts said the Ambien would have to have been ingested within 1-2 hours of her death. That's pretty significant.

Questions I have if anyone knows:

1.) Joshua Perper M.D. is the only pathologist stating that drowning was cause of death. Do we know how he determined this? Was it by examination of autopsy slides of the alveoli portion of lung tissue? And if so, how and why did the other docs miss this?

2.) In the Robinson declaration it says the bottoms of the jogging suit were never found. Is this true? Simply never found? That's pretty darn strange!


IMO just the fact that by the time LE arrived on the scene that she was entirely naked from the waist down SHOULD have alerted them that something was extremely suspicious and it should have been treated as a crime scene right then and there.

The woman had on her religious undergarment on the top and was naked from the waist down? And nobody thought that was strange?

And I would also ask, even if a woman is going to take a boat load of medications and then decide to take a bath, when undressing for said bath, who undresses down to naked on the bottom while still having on a bra, a church undergarment, and a long-sleeved jogging suit jacket on the top? While not impossible, it does not make a lot of sense.


I surely hope this (IMO) murderer is convicted. And I honestly think there is enough there for a jury to vote to convict. I just hope that the majority of it finds its way into this courtroom!
 
AlwaysShocked said:
The Prosecution has not yet presented its entire case. So there is evidence yet to come. Witnesses yet to testify.

In reading the Robinson declaration, I noticed that two different experts said the Ambien would have to have been ingested within 1-2 hours of her death. That's pretty significant.

Questions I have if anyone knows:

1.) Joshua Perper M.D. is the only pathologist stating that drowning was cause of death. Do we know how he determined this? Was it by examination of autopsy slides of the alveoli portion of lung tissue? And if so, how and why did the other docs miss this?

2.) In the Robinson declaration it says the bottoms of the jogging suit were never found. Is this true? Simply never found? That's pretty darn strange!


IMO just the fact that by the time LE arrived on the scene that she was entirely naked from the waist down SHOULD have alerted them that something was extremely suspicious and it should have been treated as a crime scene right then and there.

The woman had on her religious undergarment on the top and was naked from the waist down? And nobody thought that was strange?

And I would also ask, even if a woman is going to take a boat load of medications and then decide to take a bath, when undressing for said bath, who undresses down to naked on the bottom while still having on a bra, a church undergarment, and a long-sleeved jogging suit jacket on the top? While not impossible, it does not make a lot of sense.


I surely hope this (IMO) murderer is convicted. And I honestly think there is enough there for a jury to vote to convict. I just hope that the majority of it finds its way into this courtroom!
Click to expand...

Little Ava said her mom was fully dressed. I believe that. If Michele's pants were off, that little girl would have surely noticed that! Just to make his "story/lie" make sense, I truely believe that Martin started undressing Michele as soon as Ada left the room. That is the conclusion I have come to, based on the fact that each and every other witness that saw Michele said she had no pants on. He just didn't have enough time to get her completely naked.
 
Italy said:
Wow. That is compelling. Now I realize even more how poorly the prosecution team is presenting this case. Simply astounding to read the affidavit in its entirety.

The prosecution has got to get someone on board who can present the facts to the jury evenly, completely & with authority. That is NOT being done by the prosecution attorneys and that failure is either recklessness on the part of the DA or incompetence. Time is running out and they are going to lose in spite of this most damning recount on the part of Chief Robinson.

Thanks for providing the link.
Click to expand...

There a lot of information in there that just isn't going to be admissible at trial. Nevertheless, I think the prosecution is doing a lousy job with the evidence and testimony they are able to get in.
 
"The diagnosis of drowning is one of the most difficult in forensic pathology. Drowning is death through the aspiration of fluid into the air passages. Signs of immersion only demonstrate submersion of the body for a period of time but are not signs of drowning. The best signs of drowning are froth around the mouth and nostrils and lung distension. Lung histology in drowning victims shows non-specific lesions such as "emphysema aquosum" and alveolar edema........The diagnosis of drowning is based on police investigations, forensic autopsy, microscopic analysis, and biochemical tests, but never solely on pathology findings."

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14752383


I did not know that a diagnosis of drowning was such a difficult one! I hope if/when the pathologists who made the original cause of death determination testify in this trial that they "man up" (or "woman up") to the fact that they were likely incorrect in their determinations.

There are some other newer, very sophisticated computer measurement based methods used for examining the cells of the alveoli - which are the specialty cells within the lung where oxygen and carbon dioxide are passed into and out of the bloodstream. They actually look at the shape of the cells, which become distorted during a drowning. Plus there is hemorrhaging within the lung which is what produces the bloody froth.

It does sound like Dr. Perper is correct, that she drowned.
 
AlwaysShocked said:
"The diagnosis of drowning is one of the most difficult in forensic pathology. Drowning is death through the aspiration of fluid into the air passages. Signs of immersion only demonstrate submersion of the body for a period of time but are not signs of drowning. The best signs of drowning are froth around the mouth and nostrils and lung distension. Lung histology in drowning victims shows non-specific lesions such as "emphysema aquosum" and alveolar edema........The diagnosis of drowning is based on police investigations, forensic autopsy, microscopic analysis, and biochemical tests, but never solely on pathology findings."

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14752383


I did not know that a diagnosis of drowning was such a difficult one! I hope if/when the pathologists who made the original cause of death determination testify in this trial that they "man up" (or "woman up") to the fact that they were likely incorrect in their determinations.

There are some other newer, very sophisticated computer measurement based methods used for examining the cells of the alveoli - which are the specialty cells within the lung where oxygen and carbon dioxide are passed into and out of the bloodstream. They actually look at the shape of the cells, which become distorted during a drowning. Plus there is hemorrhaging within the lung which is what produces the bloody froth.

It does sound like Dr. Perper is correct, that she drowned.
Click to expand...

The pathologist who made the initial cause of death determination is dead. That's part of what makes this a difficult case.
 
minor4th said:
There a lot of information in there that just isn't going to be admissible at trial. Nevertheless, I think the prosecution is doing a lousy job with the evidence and testimony they are able to get in.
Click to expand...
:scared:
I always hold your opinions in high regard minor4th. Perhaps I need to open my eyes a bit more as to how the prosecution is doing
 
Finally getting caught up, watching Gypsy's testimony.

Wow! She almost seems to be enjoying herself! Forget about seeing a man who has allegedly murdered his wife to be with you - I would be so embarrassed just to discuss my participation in ruining someone's marriage. She seems almost flippant about it!

Ugh. What a despicable approach to life!

Someone help me out here. Alexis hasn't testified, has she? Is there a schedule somewhere of who is in queue to testify?
 
Never mind. I found the witness list.

So, Alexis' testimony, to this point, was only as it regarded Ada, right? She is still going to testify on her own?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Fairfield County Jane Doe (1993)?

Members online

... and 188 more.
Total: 1,857 (members: 189, guests: 1,668)

Online statistics

Members online
189
Guests online
1,668
Total visitors
1,857
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
605,955
Messages
18,195,770
Members
233,669
Latest member
Denny
Back
Top